I have owned a lot of cameras and lenses during my years of capturing memories. Up to this day, every camera has pleased me with its output, as long as I (as the operator) did my part.

When I psychically tried the OM-D on the internet by visiting camerasize.com and looking at lots of 100% crops (and then visiting my bathroom and holding a bar of soap, pretending it was the OM-D), I thought the body was good and the photos also. Certainly better, in a technical sense, than my Canon S95.

As a user of Canon FF and APS-C, Sony crop and FF, Nikon crop and FF (and V1 rental), Pentax crop, Olympus 43, Canon P&S and soon m43 (OM-D), I must say Olympus has taken good strides in improving their IQ with the OM-D.

It even gives my 5D2 an honest run for its money, all things considered.

In spite of this, I still see threads like "should I just keep my DSLR?" Why? You will NEVER get the great m43 output in as small of a package if you stick with your DSLR.

So really, sensor size being a panacea to "good photos" is complete rubbish. And people on the "giant sensor" boards are rubbish too. They defend their system investments to the death, refusing to realize proper planning from a photographer means much more than any trivial sensor size differences, unless they buy their $12,000 600mm f/4 lenses, which will never be forgotten because they're mistaken for weapons or something (and the backpain is semi-permanent).

Just buy an m43 camera and be happy with it, I say. The other boards make you think you have to shoot 4x6 sensors to make a living. A m43 camera will be with you all the time; the other stuff is too heavy!

Take it from me, a complete nobody on an international forum that doesn't even own my OM-D yet (but I've got it coming next week).